Illinois Gov. Pritzker Calls for More Gun Limits After Highland Shootings

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) and others responded to the massacre in Highland Park, Illinois with calls for more gun limits and bans. Pritzker repeated a dubious musket argument but also ignored that Illinois has some of the most stringent gun laws in the country, including bans on assault weapons and a red flag law. The media is reporting that Robert “Bobby” Crimo III, an aspiring rapper, is a person “known to law enforcement.” His postings reveal highly disturbing videos and bizarre images, including violent references.

Pritzker appeared in Highland Park after the shooting to call for more limits and criticize the protections afforded under the Second Amendment to gun owners. Pritzker repeated the common argument that

“Our founders carried muskets, not assault weapons, and I don’t think a single one of them would have said that you have a constitutional right to an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine or that that is more important than the right of the people who attended this parade today to live.”

President Biden has made an analogous and clearly false claim that certain guns were banned for private ownership when the Second Amendment was ratified: “The Second Amendment is not absolute. When it was passed you couldn’t own a cannon, you couldn’t own certain kinds of weapons. There’s just always been limitations.”

Once again, there were no federal laws barring cannon ownership when the Second Amendment was enacted. Gun laws remained local matters and I do not know of any bans on cannons or other gun types until much later in our history.  Early local laws did control concealed weapons, though concealed cannons were not part of those ordinances.

Indeed, the Constitution itself supports private cannon ownership in the case of privateers.  Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 allows Congress to “grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal.”  That allowed private parties to privateer on the high seas with . . . cannons. (Recently some members of Congress wanted to issues such letters of Marque again to enlist privateers in the fight against Russia).

Pritzker’s musket argument is equally dubious. He presumably does not take the same narrow reading of other parts of the Constitution on individual rights. For example, he recognizes that privacy is protected even though it is not mentioned and our notion of privacy rights has become more expansive over time. The “living Constitution” model allows for such expanded meaning.

Moreover, while the Framers were used to “letters” (and the Fourth Amendment references letters), few would argue that the same protection does not apply to electronic letters in the form of emails or digital files with communications.

In the end, the musket argument is often the fallback position for those who previously opposed interpreting the Second Amendment as an individual right. Some, however, also pushed that line of argument. Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney suggested that only police should have any guns of any kind.

What is interesting is that this is a state with some of the most stringent gun laws in the country. That includes a red flag law, a waiting period for gun purchases, background checks, gun owner licensing, domestic violence gun laws, and “open carry regulations.” This and other counties have “assault weapons” bans.

According to the mayor, this weapon was “legally obtained.”

As with past calls following such tragedies, the question is what in addition Pritzker is advocating that would have stopped this massacre. A high-capacity magazine ban would not stop such shootings. Anyone with a modicum of experience with weapons can swap out magazines in a matter of a seconds.


What may have stopped the massacre is the enforcement of the red flag laws given the dark and deranged postings of this individual. However, such laws depend on people reporting such warning signs and police enforcing the laws. The fact is that many shooters are not known to police or experience a sudden and lethal turn where such laws are largely ineffective.

As a Chicago native, I am very familiar with this area and spent a great deal of time in Highland Park and neighboring towns. It is a very affluent area with a relatively small population. Yet, even in this small community with considerable assets for mental health and law enforcement intervention, red flag and other laws did not prevent the shooting.

For politicians like Pritzker (and President Biden) who raised new limits after this shooting, there should be a demand for specifics on not just how they will constitutionally limit guns but whether such limits would have actually prevented this tragedy. There remain areas where we can make real progress, particularly in the greater funding of mental illness programs. However, there must also be greater honesty about the range of constitutional and practical options in dealing with such shootings.

286 thoughts on “Illinois Gov. Pritzker Calls for More Gun Limits After Highland Shootings”

  1. Professor Turley once again tries to search for common sense gun laws. This position always perplexes me because he’s such an ardent proponent of our other amendments. Here is my proposal for common sense gun regulation:

    All free Americans, free meaning that they are not currently in jail, may own and carry any arms they wish; provided they are able to maintain them properly.

    This would mean that anyone who is free to walk the streets may use whatever means they see fit in order to protect themselves; convicted felons included. If a person is free to walk among the general population that person can illegally obtain any small arms they wish. Illegal gun dealers don’t ask for identification, nor do they have a background check or a waiting period. Every gun law enacted only creates criminals out if formerly law-abiding citizens.

  2. Facebook knows when I say sonething “hurtful” to a whiney woke widget but they say nothing about his posts? I do believe they knew all about him, juat like the others, but why do these nuts always make their move when the dems need a diversion?

    1. @Alma Carmen

      I’ve wondered that as well. I’m not prone to tin foil hat thinking, but the timing of virtually all if these incidents over the past number of years usually does seem to be quite the coincidental convenience. Sort of like piles of bricks magically appearing before protests.

  3. P.S. ( to my earlier comment)………..Dumb and Dumber (Pritzker and Biden) want to ban assault weapons in Illinois, but they’ve been banned, already.
    I guess they could ban them again, and use a bigger font this time? Just a thought.

    1. Cindi Bragg,

      “ P.S. ( to my earlier comment)………..Dumb and Dumber (Pritzker and Biden) want to ban assault weapons in Illinois, but they’ve been banned, already.”

      Uh, nope. Assault weapons have not been banned in Illinois. In fact they are legal there.

      “ His weapon of choice was a gun that is legal to buy in Illinois. In fact, Illinois state law does not restrict assault weapons at all, but local jurisdictions can up the ante.

    2. This is common place on the left.

      All problems require a new law to solve.

      When the old law did not work – ignore that and pass a new one.

      I get tired of idiot politicians claiming that some law they passed saved millions of lives – when there is no evidence of any benefit at all.

      The left wants ever more laws,
      but no law enforcement – except against political enemies where no law is needed, it is sufficient to convict to note they are political enemies.

  4. The lazy liberal response to these tragedies is to take guns away from the people who don’t commit crimes, hoping that real criminals will also get caught in the net. They seem to want it both ways: defund police and take them off the streets, and take away all guns from law-abiding people. This is supposed to reduce crime. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see what it will really do: only criminals who don’t give a fig for their laws will be left on the streets — streets without cops or people who can defend themselves. This country allows half witted liberals to make policy, and then we have to wait for the tragic consequences before the adults step in and fix things.

  5. I would agree to a musket only rule if the authorities were also included.

  6. “ Moreover, while the Framers were used to “letters” (and the Fourth Amendment references letters), few would argue that the same protection does not apply to electronic letters in the form of emails or digital files with communications.”

    According to “originalist” philosophy and textualist views. The 4th amendment does not and should not apply to electronic communication. Using the very same reasoning the conservative justices use emails and phone records shouldn’t be protected. The constitution only mentions papers, not electronic media.

    It’s funny how constitutional originalists suddenly apply selective interpretation of the constitution using the living document form of interpretation. Pretty convenient.

    1. They read the constitution the same way they read the bible, only the parts they like.

    2. Svelaz, a not very bright partisan liberal, makes the rather spurious argument that since the Court has over the years expanded THE PEOPLE’S PROTECTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT regarding the 4th Amendment by now protecting modern devices from government invasiveness then it should be able to expand it’s meaning TO RESTRICT THE PEOPLE’S RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.

      You see liberal, one expands people’s protection from government while the other one expands the government’s reach against the people.

      1. Hullbobby,

        The current majority in the SC disagrees with you.

        The terms “electronic communications” are nowhere in the constitution. Neither is the term “privacy”. Just like the term, “ abortion” is not in the constitution either. Justice Alito’s opinion used this logic in making his argument. So according to Alito’s judicial philosophy electronic communications including emails are not protected under the 4th amendment.

        This is Alito’s reasoning, not mine.

        1. Svelaz,

          You said; “This is Alito’s reasoning, not mine.”

          No, this is your simplistic interpretation of matters that obviously go way over your head.

          1. That’s why Alito’s reasoning is thought of as correct. Because it’s simplistic.

            The word “abortion” is not in the constitution. Neither is “electronic communications”. Originalism requires that the constitution be interpreted with only the context and meanings of the words of their time. Textualists interpretation of the constitution requires that only the words IN the constitution are interpreted in their context when they were written. It’s their reasoning, not mine.

    3. Tell me which case SCOTUS got wrong.
      Just making the statement is trolling unless you can pick a case and show how it has veered from the constitution.

    4. Tell me which cases SCOTUS has veered from strict constitutional adherence.

      Making a claim without evidence is lazy trolling.

      Get involved in the discussion. Stop sniping.

  7. So, would this be a case where Red Flag laws did not work?
    Just looking as some of his social media postings, one would think they would of triggered at least one Red Flag law.

    Concerning the whole musket argument, the Founding Fathers knew of technological advances were going to occur. Like the smooth bore musket was being replaced by the more accurate “rifles” (in reference to the rifling of the barrel). Also of note, the Boston shipyards were producing more advanced, and better manufacturing techniques, i.e. technological advances.
    I think the Founding Fathers would of been more horrified of things like social media, than the so-called “assault” rifle.
    I know I am.

    1. “ Concerning the whole musket argument, the Founding Fathers knew of technological advances were going to occur.”

      No they didn’t. They were more preoccupied with how to maintain armed militias in case of slave revolts than technological advances. They were more concerned about the problem of increasing numbers of slaves and how to keep revolts from becoming a problem for southern states who where heavily reliant on them.

      Their concern was militias. Not guns themselves.

      1. “Their concern was militias. Not guns themselves.”

        I made a correction to make your statement accurate. Then it just turns to gibberish. Exactly the result of your comment.

        Militia, is nothing but, every able bodied citizen.

        1. Nope, a militia is literally an armed group of citizens regulated by the state. Southern states wanted to have their own militias to control so they could keep slaves in check.

          A militia is not every able bodied citizen.
          You are one very confused fella.

          1. Nope, a militia is literally an armed group of citizens regulated by the state

            Nope, militias by definition are independent of Government.

            1. “ Nope, militias by definition are independent of Government.”

              No, they are not. They are regulated by government. They don’t act on their own. They have no authority unless they are under a government command. Otherwise it’s just a bunch of uncoordinated, untrained people pretending to be soldiers.

  8. I’ve just tried to find if the police have uncovered a motive and I find nothing. Before anyone starts pointing fingers let’s get all the facts.

    1. Margot Ballhere,
      Some cannot be bothered with things like “facts.”
      Just look at the Border Patrol agents, cleared of any wrong doing for the alleged “whipping” of migrants with the horse reins, but are still going to be administrative punished.

      Otherwise, I agree with your statement.

  9. Is he on SSRIs?

    Here’s the common denominator in all shootings. The shooter is always nuts. The shooter is always deranged. The shooter is always a mental case. And more than than not they are on SSRIs. Notice females are never shooters. Why? It seems SSRIs affects males with anger.

    Shootings started shortly after the public push by pharma in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Even thought they were developed in the 1950s they had problems and were not revised until 1983. By the time of Columbine in 1999, these drugs were widely prescribe to adolescents who had mental issues. They caused anger in many.

    In 1991, a FBI whistle blower wrote a book describing the agency grooming mental teenagers to become mass shooters in order to remove the second amendment of the US Constitution. Most wrote off this warning, the media, as usual, yawned and called in conspiracy.

    After the propaganda of Covid and the death shot, do you really think government and big pharma are not capable of manipulating events to control more of mankind?

    Get use to the idea that this country will split in at least in two separate countries. Roe v Wade, the second amendment especially are issues that will never go away. We will never see eye to eye. And these are only two issues.

    Guns had a very close relationship with US citizens. Kids brought their guns to show and tell. There were gun clubs in middle and high school. Gun racks with rifles could be seen in school parking lots. Then one day it all changed. Why all of the sudden did this relationship with guns change so drastically! You be the judge, but too me it’s obviously being manipulated.

    1. Actually, shootings go back to when firearms were first invented and there was mass murder in what is now the United States going back into antiquity. Killing others is part of human nature. No, not all of those who have killed are men. There have been female shooters, but most shooters use pistols and the media doesn’t focus on them. Neither is it a fact that all shooters are deranged since most were either eventually killed by cops or shot themselves. This writer mentions Columbine but the first school shooting wasn’t Columbine, it was when two young teenage boys in Jonesboro, Arkansas took two high-powered hunting rifles and an M-1 carbine replica along with an assortment of pistols and started taking potshots at their classmates and teachers after pulling a fire alarm. The Columbine shooters were copycats. Both of the boys were tried as juveniles and released into society when they reached adulthood. In reality, so-called “mass shootings” using so-called “assault rifles” are few and far between. Most shootings involve pistols and are gang-related – with Chicago having the most shootings of any city on earth.

  10. When it comes to hypocrites like Biden and Pritzker, facts should be banned, too,,,,along with guns.
    Facts are such nuisances.
    And it’s downright uncanny how the media coverage of this tragedy is EXACTLY (not!) like the media coverage given to the Waukesha, Wisconsin tragedy last December, when a black man purposefully drove his car into and through the Christmas parade, killing 6 people.

  11. Conservatives will not accept a “baby” being aborted in the womb, but they continue to countenance it being killed by a gun.

      1. “ Millions of children have been killed by abortion, a relative handful have been killed by guns.”


        “ Firearms were the leading cause of death for kids one and older for the first time in 2020, the most recent year for which CDC data is available.

        Why it matters: The firearm death rate among children is steadily rising, as more kids are involved in gun-related homicides like Tuesday’s mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, as well as suicides and accidents.

        By the numbers: Nearly two-thirds of the 4,368 U.S. children up to age 19 who were killed by guns in 2020 were homicide victims, per the CDC. Motor vehicle crashes, formerly the leading cause of death for kids one and older, killed nearly 4,000 children.

        Another 30% of firearm-related child fatalities were suicides, 3% were accidental and 2% were of undetermined intent.”

        1. “ Firearms were the leading cause of death for kids one and older for the first time in 2020, the most recent year for which CDC data is available.”

          Does banning guns alter the deaths? Most are homicides in cities like Chicago, where guns are already illegal. Legally held guns save more lives than they kill.

          How come the Biden Administration worries about guns but forgets about Fentanyl and drugs streaming across the southern border. That is where huge numbers of young people die. The total number of deaths exceeds 100,000 and is climbing. The reason is not that the left cares about young people or death. It is because the left is power-hungry and corrupt.

    1. Red herring, as always, but a straw man too. A twofer! Let me try!

      Liberals won’t accept an American with rights, but they continue to countenance mass killings of civilians, including children, with drones.

      Now, lemme guess. That convinced you. (That’s how convincing you are.)

      “How to be a winner: dedicate your life to quickly commenting on all Turley’s posts with nonsequiter polemics.” –Jeff

    2. How absurd to say conservatives don’t care about the murder rate and the massive rise in murders in cities. should we say liberal mayors, governors, and DAs don’t care about murder rates because they are perpetuating it with bad policies and releasing criminals into the streets to kill and commit crimes again? The most dangerous areas in the US are run by liberals and have been for decades.

    3. News flash: Conservatives support laws making it illegal to kill babies with guns – just as they support laws making it illegal to dismember, decapitate and chop preborn babies into tiny pieces in the womb. That makes them consistent. The exact opposite of your claim.

      Your bumper sticker slogan is neither accurate nor clever. It’s false. And dumb.

      Try harder.

      1. Phil Davis says:

        “You do know that more die at the hands of a knife than a gun don’t you?”

        So what?

        1. “You do know that more die at the hands of a knife than a gun don’t you?”

          So what?

          Why do you want gun ownership reduced if your response to death is “so what?”

          You sound ridiculous, Right?

    4. Jeff, who is countenancing the killing of people? We have your side having jubilees with women shouting their abortions, women bragging about their abortions and people screaming their support for abortion. Can you name one conservative who had a party championing the killing of a person? What a moronic argument, even for you.

      Now just return to your Trump insanity.

      1. Hullbobby,

        I thought you would be delighted by my not mentioning Trump for once. I can’t win for trying!

    5. Mr. Silberman,
      The most recent death statistics show that more people are murdered with blunt objects than with rifles. Does that mean that we should pass common sense hammer control laws in response?
      As far as your tie in to abortion, those of us who find abortion morally abhorrent would say that killing a person, whether it be a child in the womb or a grandmother at a parade, is a terrible act. What you are doing is saying that people who hold their right to self defense sacred are somehow ok with the actions of a heartless killer. Are you saying that the amount of abortions that have been performed, which have taken the lives of millions of babies, the majority of whom were conceived by minorities, are equal to the mass murder sprees carried out by mad men?
      If the last statement is the case, then you and I finally agree on something!

      1. Irregular Poster posts:

        “The most recent death statistics show that more people are murdered with blunt objects than with rifles. Does that mean that we should pass common sense hammer control laws in response?”

        Yes, when hammers are used in mass killings.

        You post:

        “As far as your tie in to abortion, those of us who find abortion morally abhorrent would say that killing a person, whether it be a child in the womb or a grandmother at a parade, is a terrible act.”

        I don’t equate a fetus with a grandmother; only Conservatives do because they lie.

        You post:

        “What you are doing is saying that people who hold their right to self defense sacred are somehow ok with the actions of a heartless killer.”

        They don’t wish it, but they will begrudgingly accept it

        You post:

        “Are you saying that the amount of abortions that have been performed, which have taken the lives of millions of babies, the majority of whom were conceived by minorities, are equal to the mass murder sprees carried out by mad men?”

        I don’t deem a non-viable fetus a “baby,” and I don’t deem mass murderers “mad.” They are sane enough to know to grab an assault weapon with plenty of high-capacity clips. I’d say they are acting rather rationally to be more “successful.”

    6. Jeff, we are going to have ,250,000 dead, poisoned by fentynal, this year, The vast majority coming across a border Democrats refuse to police.

      If you cared about innocents dying, you would demand the Government do what is within their constututional power. Instead of playing politics with citizens enumerated rights.

      1. Iowan,

        When you and your fellow Trumpists admit that the election was not stolen and that you concede that it was one Big Lie from the get go, we’ll talk. Until then, I refuse to speak in good faith with people who continue to lie to my face.

        Are we clear?

    7. Jeff, We are on track to have 250,000 fentynal deaths this year. All because Democrats refuse to enforce laws already on the books, and close the border. You only care about this shooting because your perceive it as a political advantage. Not for the the loss of life, because your inaction is proof you dont care about loss of life. You can add ~50 migrants cooked to death in a truck, to the tally. You can add 100’s of women raped, or sold into the sex trade, as lives Democrats consider expendable to the agenda of amassing political power at any cost.

      1. Iowan2,

        Judaism does not have the murder of millions of Jews, Roma and political and military prisoners on its hands as do Christians who participated in the Holocaust. “Good” Christians behaving badly?

        1. stick to the topic retard.
          Do you give rat rears end about a couple of hundred thousand young adults poisoned by fentynal crossing a border that Democrats work hard to keep wide open.
          You could start saving 500 lives a day, almost overnite by following the law and policing the border. You were asleep at the wheel while ~50 brown people were slow roasted in Texas, but expending energy to stop such atrocities fails to engage the left/right battle, you crave.
          But you would rather spend your energy and political capital stripping citizens of their enumerated rights.

          You care not for human life. only perceived, short term, political advantage.

          1. Iowan2,

            Pope Pius XII led the Catholic Church during World War II. His silence on the fate of the millions of Jews killed during the Holocaust is on your head.

            1. Do you know what century your in?

              The here and now is proof you and all the leftists only care about power. You constant yammering about carring for the less advantaged is is a lie, exposed by the massive death misery aided by an open border.
              250,000 fentynal deaths you refuse to acknowledge or act on.

              1. Not to mention Christianity’s hand in slavery. I will not be lectured on morality by the likes of you.

                    1. The first peoples in the world to end slavery were anglo white christians.

                      The US was not the first country in the world to end slavery – but it was one of the earliest,.
                      And it had by far one of the most painful experiences doing so.

                  1. the retard doesn’t know any of these things about slavery. With the intellect of an eight year old, all he can do is spit out what other people have said, totally unaware of how stupid it is.

                    Having to face the fact that Democrats are sacrificing human life at a sickening rate, only to gain a perceived political win, has stripped the gears in his little walnut sized brain.

                1. It’s not morality, It reason and logic.

                  Like I explained originally. The only thing you care about is getting a political point scored. And you are willing to stand on the corpses of 250,000 Americans te feed your pathetic ego.

                    1. I’ll correct your cockamamie ideas and refute your Trumpist lies, but I will pay no mind when you give your opinion of my moral character. I don’t respect people who engage in your sophomoric name-calling.

  12. I was at the parade with my wife. 3 blocks from where we live. Standing half a block from the building where the shooter fired from. I don’t own a gun. I have never even held a gun. When in High School in the early 70’s I was at a party. A fellow student was shot and killed who was standing next to me. If the guy was a bad shot, it could have been me. It was gang related. Even after being in close proximity to two horrific events , I am still not in favor of repealing the 2nd Amendment. For those who are now calling for the Amendment to be overturned, like demented Olbermann, I will be ok with that. Just realize that you need 2/3 of the House and Senate .Or a Constitutional Convention called by 2/3 of state legislators. And 3/4 of the States need to approve. You can’t pick and choose which part of the Constitution that you are willing to accept.

    1. Paul, I read your comment this morning and wanted to respond but had to wait until now. Nevertheless, I didn’t forget you.

      I am very sorry for your difficult experiences, especially for your family being subjected to such a nightmare. I hope they are as ok as they can be after something like this. God bless and protect you and your family, Paul.

      I agree, the 2nd should not be infringed. In this episode, Crimo had been investigated for suicidal ideation and for putting his family in fear. They even asked the police to take Crimo’s knife collection, which the cops did. Crimo was the poster child for the red flag laws in Illinois, and yet the authorities did nothing.

      They also did nothing about Hodgkinson, the Illinois nut who shot our GOP congressman, even though he also exhibited alarming behavior well before that shooting. Then there was Parkland, Florida. It’s Groundhog Day once again for the lefties and their gun laws, but they won’t admit it.

      If Democrats won’t enforce existing gun laws–even to the point of releasing violent criminals and blaming their crimes on “racism”–then the left should not be surprised that millions are choosing to newly exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

      All violence is more about culture than legislation, anyway. Mexico has much stricter gun laws than even our left is proposing, and Mexico still has a terrible gun-homicide rate. Switzerland is very lenient and yet has a far lower gun-homicide rate. The left’s inability to enforce their own gun laws in this country only confirms that culture plays the bigger role, and sadly, America’s culture has more than its share of mental illness and crime.

      Disarming the law abiding won’t help. The out-of-control border already isn’t helping.

      1. Diogenes,
        I also am sorry for the late reply.
        Thank you so much for your kind words. My wife and I truly appreciate them.

  13. 9 people were murdered and 50 were wounded by guns this weekend in Chicago. Not a whisper from any of these publicity hounds. It is ok to kill black people but when white people get murdered, there is almost literally a rush to the microphone to pontificate about the evils of guns

  14. Our country is exceptional in having the best armed mass killers.

    Since the SC has made it very difficult to restrict weapons, I’m beginning to think that the only way we will ever get a grip on mass shootings is if EVERYONE over the age of say, 21, carries a weapon in public- open carry- and are trained to use it. Until mass shooters realize that there are no gun-free zones, they may never stop. We need to return to the days of the Wild West.

    1. Jeff, I posted a couple of minutes after you. Maybe you didn’t see it. First of all, I don’t think anyone under 21 should have access to a weapon. And all should have background checks. The guy here was 22, so age limit would not have stopped him. Still don’t know how he acquired the weapon.
      But this guys photo and social media posts should have been a ” Red Flag” to those close to him.
      I am sure that he will be exposed as a ” loner” who kept to himself and didn’t ” play well with others”.
      His father owns a deli near Ravinia. A local music venue.
      I for one, appreciate your sarcasm. Not sure about the timing.

      1. Lots of teens in my area hunt or on marksmanship teams. They seem to be pretty responsible with their access to weapons.

        1. Prairie Rose,
          I find that to be a interesting observation.
          I too have noted teens who have been brought up with firearms, hunt or on a marksmanship team, are more responsible, mature for their age.
          However, there are comparatively few who should not be allowed access to firearms, e.g. the Highland shooter.

          Knew a guy in high school, was something of a real jerk. Then he got into martial arts. It really grounded him. The change was obvious. Later I shot pool with him.

          1. UpstateFarmer,
            “I am sure that he will be exposed as a ” loner” who kept to himself and didn’t ” play well with others”.”

            This seems to be a fairly common denominator. Disconnection from reality, from a sense of community, from their own souls and humanity. Loss of groundedness.

            I see it as only going to get worse if we lose ourselves in Zuckerberg’s Metaverse or any of the corporatists’ push towards online everything–online work, online commerce, online school, online siloed “community”. Everything online except our souls and sense of self–that disconnection will worsen and wither.

            1. Prairie Rose,
              Good observation.

              Looking back over the decades, while technological advancements seem all well and good, they are a double edge sword. Social media seems to have a sharper edge than some other technologies.
              Some day, some historian will note the demise of the USA as a society and culture will not be from gun “culture” but the demise of community, connected to community, connected to nature, a sense of national identity.
              I fear your prediction will be right.

              1. UpstateFarmer,
                It does not need to be an accurate prediction, though. It would be better for us as a nation if we stepped off this path.

                There is goodness in our society. There is goodness in our culture. Perhaps we should build a bridge to the eighteenth century to mend the frayed edges of ourselves and our communities and to remember where we came from and who we are and where we could be headed.

                It is best to not seesaw like yoked oxen might when they get out of sync, for then we will lose our sense of how to pull forward and carry the burdens of society.

                From Farmer Boy by Laura Ingalls Wilder:

                Star and Bright pulled, but the sled did not move. Then Star tried to pull, and quit trying. Bright tried, and gave up just as Star tried again. They both stopped, discouraged.

                “Giddap! Giddap!” Almanzo kept shouting, cracking his whip.

                Star tried again, then Bright, then Star. The sled did not move. Star and Bright stood still, puffing out the breath from their noses. Almanzo felt like crying and swearing. He shouted: “Giddap! Giddap!”

                John and Joe stopped sawing, and Joe came over to the sled.

                “You’re too heavy loaded,” he said. “You boys get down and walk. And Almanzo, you talk to your team and gentle them along. You’ll make them steers balky if you don’t be careful.”

                Almanzo climbed down. He rubbed the yearlings’ throats and scratched around their horns. He lifted the yoke a little and ran his hand under it, and settled it gently in place. All the time he talked to the little steers. Then he stood beside Star and cracked his whip and shouted: “Giddap!”

                Star and Bright pulled together, and the sled moved. Almanzo trudged all the way home. Pierre and Louis walked in the smooth tracks behind the runners, but Almanzo had to struggle through the soft, deep snow beside Star. When he reached the woodpile at home, Father said he had done well to get out of the timber.

                “Next time, son, you’ll know better than to put on such a heavy load before the road’s broken,” Father said. “You spoil a team if you let them seesaw. They get the idea they can’t pull the load, and they quit trying. After that, they’re no good.”

      2. “I don’t think anyone under 21 should have access to a weapon.”

        I understand your rationale, but one question. At what age is a child (21 is still maturing) best able to learn how to be safe with firearms? At home with the parents, or when the child moves out and starts living alone?

      3. Paul,

        I feel sorry that your community experienced this misfortune. What were the odds? Nowadays, mass shoutings are not long shots.

    2. Mr. Silberman, now you are finally getting it! If a person wants to murder a large group of people, it would be extremely difficult to do so if they knew that those people were also armed.
      After all, an armed society is a polite society.

  15. It would seem that with all the censorship often used by the Big Tech media that they never seem to find the postings of these persons and report them to authorities. As you note Illinois has Red Flag laws but we rarely hear of them being used in Illinois. Since I live in the state next door (Indiana) we do hear a lot about gun laws not being enforced in Chicago and it’s surrounding area. Or people being arrested with firearms who are not legally allowed to have them, yet seem to be out of custody quite quickly. Our state also gets blamed for all of the guns in Illinois where data shows that the unlawful carrying and use of firearms in the Chicago area is due to theft both personally and of shipping through Chicago. No mention as to whether these were legally purchased firearms, did his family know that this individual with “mental problems’ had firearms. What kind of mental problems
    With all the hacking done in the online community, it would seem a simple matter to outline parameters for a search engine of people with threatening behavior, comparing it to the listings on the FBI firearms database and then decide to refer to local police,. ATF or the FBI itself. Seems there are a great number of legal means to identify these people if there is a will to do it.

    1. Phil and GEB

      “Is he on SSRIs?”

      “It would seem that with all the censorship ”

      The mass murderers are showing an aggressive and suicidal nature. Both occur with anti-depressants though supposedly at a lower rate with the newest classes of drugs. The timing might also have an effect, at least with the older drugs. I understand that suicide would be more likely when first taking the medication than after being on a stable dose.

      The complete information on what medications these mass killers are on is lacking. The first sentence of the following study is disturbing.

      ” In the summary trial reports on Eli Lilly’s website, almost all deaths were noted, but all suicidal ideation events were missing, and the information on the remaining outcomes was incomplete.

      Conclusions Because of the shortcomings identified and having only partial access to appendices with no access to case report forms, the harms could not be estimated accurately. In adults there was no significant increase in all four outcomes, but in children and adolescents the risk of suicidality and aggression doubled. To elucidate the harms reliably, access to anonymised individual patient data is needed.”

  16. “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

    Once again a cynical politician uses a tragedy to further a political agenda.

  17. I saw a comment about the first amendment… that it only protects us when we use ink and quill and that there is no protection of the first Amendment for the Internet.
    (You need to think about it if you are anti-2A)

    What most people don’t know is that when the State of IL was ratifying their court mandated CCW law. There was a small window where communities could create their own local ordinances on guns so that they were grandfathered in. Highland Park created a law that banned ARs. At the time it was blank. Then later it was modified w content. The lower courts found it to be legal.

    So Highland Park was a ‘gun free’ zone.

    The issue isn’t the gun, but the nut job behind it.

    What is amazing is that there’s a call for thought police.
    Maybe we should red flag those actors and writers in Hollywood who think out these gun battles as part of the movies.

    Or the horror movies and books.

Leave a Reply